In a previous post, I wrote about GreenShift Corporation’s (GreenShift) patent suit against GEA Westfalia Separator, Inc. (Westfalia), in which GreenShift accused the New Jersey-based separator and decanter maker of infringing U.S. Patent No. 7,601,858 (‘858 Patent).
Last month GreenShift asserted the ‘858 Patent again, alleging that Indiana ethanol maker Cardinal Ethanol (“Cardinal”) is infringing the patent by using equipment that employs the patented ethanol processing methods. The suit was filed in federal court in Indianapolis.
The ‘858 Patent is entitled “Method of processing ethanol byproducts and related subsystems” and is directed to methods of recovering oil from byproducts of ethanol production.
Ethanol production by dry milling creates a waste stream comprised of byproducts called whole stillage. According to the ‘858 Patent, whole stillage contains valuable oil but prior processes for recovering this oil have been expensive or inefficient.
GreenShift’s patented methods include mechanically separating the whole stillage into distillers wet grains and thin stillage and then running the thin stillage into an evaporator to form a concentrated byproduct, or syrup. The syrup is fed through a second centrifuge, which separates usable corn oil from the syrup.
Along with the complaint, GreenShift filed a motion for preliminary injunction (PI), in which it argued that it has a strong likelihood of proving infringement, the ‘858 Patent is valid, and it would suffer irreparable harm if Cardinal is not enjoined (see packet including GreenShift’s press release, the complaint and the PI motion here).
The PI motion includes a detailed claim chart that seeks to demonstrate Cardinal’s alleged infringement of claims 8, 10, 12, 13, 14 and 16 of the ‘858 Patent.
As to the alleged harm, GreenShift states that Cardinal’s infringement is causing it to suffer “loss of market share, opportunities, revenue and goodwill” as well as damage to its “reputation as a technology pioneer.”